Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

businessweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#31

Post by coldtea »

cygwin98 wrote: post #28

The fragmentation issue in Mac OS X [1] is the hurdle that has been holding me off from writing apps for Macs. According to [1] (published about half a year ago), the Mac OS X market share breakdown: 26.8% Mountain Lion 10.8 28.0% Lion 10.7 35.1% Snow Leopard 10.6 10.0% Leopard 10.5 and Tiger 10.4 If we assume that half of the macs running Snow Leopard (10.6) are pre-2007 and ineligible for 10.9, we have about 72.3%…

>The fragmentation issue in Mac OS X [1] is the hurdle that has been holding me off from writing apps for Macs.

Doesn't seem to be doing much damage to Mac software houses/indies...

>According to [1] (published about half a year ago), the Mac OS X market share breakdown: Mountain Lion 10.8 26.8% Lion 10.7 28% Snow Leopard 10.6 35.1% Leopard and lower 10%

So just target Lion and above, that's 54%, which might sound small, but it's tens of millions of users. Mac software houses thrived in 2005 with 1/4 the user base that what that 54% represents.

That said, I highly doubt SL is 35% still.

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#32

Post by xutopia »

roc wrote: post #27
xutopia wrote: post #2

I think this guy completely misses the most important point. Apple sees how much fragmentation hurts Windows and Android and they want to avoid it. Imagine if as a developer you only have to worry about a single platform? Imagine if as a distributor you only have to worry about releasing a single package? It makes things much easier for everyone and allows efforts to be on quality rather than compatibility.

That's part of it, but it doesn't speak to why they also made iWork and iLife free.

Admittedly the reasoning behind iWork and iLife is different. The competition (Google Docs/Drive) is doing it for free. No point in selling software if a high quality competitor will offer theirs up for free.

The point here is to keep people using their hardware and the tight integration into iCloud for those products ensures a longer term lock in.

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#33

Post by afreak »

cygwin98 wrote: post #28

The fragmentation issue in Mac OS X [1] is the hurdle that has been holding me off from writing apps for Macs. According to [1] (published about half a year ago), the Mac OS X market share breakdown: 26.8% Mountain Lion 10.8 28.0% Lion 10.7 35.1% Snow Leopard 10.6 10.0% Leopard 10.5 and Tiger 10.4 If we assume that half of the macs running Snow Leopard (10.6) are pre-2007 and ineligible for 10.9, we have about 72.3%…

Chances are that if someone is two point releases behind for their Mac OS X install then likely they're not a potential customer if what you're doing fills a niche.

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#34

Post by cygwin98 »

coldtea wrote: post #31
cygwin98 wrote: post #28

The fragmentation issue in Mac OS X [1] is the hurdle that has been holding me off from writing apps for Macs. According to [1] (published about half a year ago), the Mac OS X market share breakdown: 26.8% Mountain Lion 10.8 28.0% Lion 10.7 35.1% Snow Leopard 10.6 10.0% Leopard 10.5 and Tiger 10.4 If we assume that half of the macs running Snow Leopard (10.6) are pre-2007 and ineligible for 10.9, we have about 72.3%…

> The fragmentation issue in Mac OS X [1] is the hurdle that has been holding me off from writing apps for Macs. Doesn't seem to be doing much damage to Mac software houses/indies... > According to [1] (published about half a year ago), the Mac OS X market share breakdown: Mountain Lion 10.8 26.8% Lion 10.7 28% Snow Leopard 10.6 35.1% Leopard and lower 10% So just target Lion and above, that's 54%, which might sound…

So just target Lion and above, that's 54%, which might sound small, but it's tens of millions of users. Mac software houses thrived in 2005 with 1/4 the user base that what that 54% represents.

That's true. Though it's still way better to support 72% in one API than 54% in two slightly different APIs.

That said, I highly doubt SL is 35% still.

I think you're right. Those 32bit Intel iMacs are probably on their last legs at this moment. In one year, I predict Mavericks may have 80% or even higher market share, comparable to its remote cousin iOS7's share on iOS devices.

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#35

Post by a_c_s »

dhruvmittal wrote: post #11
dmyler wrote: post #5

It's also a response to google docs. Introducing collaboration on iWork is a good first step to address to the shift towards shared docs. I imagine we'll see that expand significantly in the future.

I just wish they'd gone ahead and made iWork free across the board (or perhaps for Mavericks users), rather than only with the purchase of a new device.

This likely has to do with GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles).

iOS updates used to cost a nominal amount of money because new features have to have new revenues. (Why? Imagine you are selling a physical good, and promised a 1 year warranty - you have to reserve some revenue to cover the costs of honoring that warranty. If you didn't it would artificially inflate profits now by hiding future liabilities.)

So what Apple does to get around this is reserve a bit of revenue from each new iPhone and realizes it on the balance sheet to cover the ongoing costs of iOS updates. I imagine this is what they are going to do with Macs too to cover OS X costs, and if this is correct it will likely be mentioned at next week's conference call.

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#36

Post by netcan »

I think with Apple, you kind of need to consider their aesthetic. I don't think they like selling anything cheaply. The last few OS upgrades were cheap. iWork is cheaper than MS Office (because it is often an optional extra with office being mandatory) and (ironically) being in the iOS market means that they have an €8.99 version of iWork anchoring he price. Overall software sales are not big money makers for Apple.

OTOH, you they can simplify a bunch of things by making OSX upgrades cheaper. Users no longer need to worry about OS updates (eg time their purchase). They can sell macs as "ready to go with all the software you need" for creative or office workers. A new mac will be easier to get used to. Developers can target a single OS version, this includes Apple. Apple can release features relying on new OS features.

It's just simpler. Apple have an aesthetic preference for simpler. For the cost of whatever revenue these software sales were bringing in they get to improve and simplify the mac ownership experience. They get to differentiate themselves from PCs in one more difficult to quantify way. This is another thing they like. You don't have to buy antivirus & Office or worry about Windows upgrades.

Financially it's probably a wash. Slightly better mac sales or increased pricing power will more or less make up for lost revenue.

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#37

Post by bradleyland »

The author doesn't understand Apple. Apple doesn't view software and hardware separately. Coincidentally, I just wrote about this, but I'll copy and paste here because it seems relevant.

A friend of mine recently asked me how Apple expected to continue making any money while giving away software that Microsoft charges $200 for. Understanding how Apple can give away their software and still make money comes in understanding Apple's business. Apple pundits frequently circle back to the point that Apple is a “hardware” company. As it turns out, they are wrong. Apple is a “devices” company. What is unique about Apple is their view that a device is made up of hardware & software, and that these two are inseparable. Apple believes this is the best view if you want to deliver a superior experience to the users of your products.

If you look at Apple as a hardware company — which I believe is a mistake — they make better margins than any of their competitors. Following that flawed line of thinking, what they're doing now is using that extra profit to subsidize the software side. This viewpoint only holds if you view the hardware and software sides of the business as separate entities though.

Apple has combined the two. You're not buying hardware or software, you're buying a device. What good is a microwave without the software that connects the buttons to the timer, microwave generator, etc? Thats how Apple views their devices. By making Mavericks and iWork free, theyre expanding their notion of the "post PC world". They're not just talking about iOS devices, theyre talking about their entire line up.

If youre wondering why Apples “PC” sales continue to grow while everyone else is sinking, I think youve found your answer.

http://www.bradlanders.com/2013/10/23/apples-greater-vision-...

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#38

Post by netcan »

theorique wrote: post #15
kbutler wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually basic economics - reduce the price of your complementary goods. Thus, Apple wants to drive the software cost to zero, to increase sales of hardware (this includes apps). Google wants to drive the software and hardware cost to zero, to increase ad viewing. Amazon wants to drive the software and hardware cost to zero to sell more content.

As Joel Spolsky said: "commoditize your complements". http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html

I'm not sure if that includes the complements that you yourself produce. At least that's not what Joel argues.

There are business models (eg, razors & razor blades) where you commoditize one to sell the other, but commoditizing complements that someone else now makes at razor thin margins is the coup.

Re: Why Apple Wants Its Software to Be Free

#40

Post by Symbol »

microtonal wrote: post #7
xutopia wrote: post #2

I think this guy completely misses the most important point. Apple sees how much fragmentation hurts Windows and Android and they want to avoid it. Imagine if as a developer you only have to worry about a single platform? Imagine if as a distributor you only have to worry about releasing a single package? It makes things much easier for everyone and allows efforts to be on quality rather than compatibility.

Imagine if as a developer you only have to worry about a single platform? Actually, this was one of my first reaction as a developer. I developed and maintain a scientific software package (treebank search) that I maintain for Windows (>= XP), OS X (>= 10.7), and Linux (latest Ubuntu LTS). My first reaction after hearing that Mavericks is free was: great, if most people will upgrade, I am freed of supporting the lega…

I won't be surprised if we get to the point where OS updates can be done seamlessly in the background without user prompting. I also won't be surprised if Apple will be the first vendor to sell us on it.
Post reply on HN